[Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - bicycle=use_cycleway

Masi Master masi-master at gmx.de
Fri Nov 15 18:56:13 UTC 2013

Am 15.11.2013, 17:13 Uhr, schrieb Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org>:

> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013, Masi Master wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm the co-author of this proposal.
>> There are a difference about bicycle-forbidden and a compulsory  
>> cycleway.
>> In Germany it is allowed to leave the cycleway for a leftturn, if you
>> choose the normal leftturn-lane (which cars use). Or in Austria training
>> with a racebike is allowed to don't look after compulsory cycleway. I.e.
>> for the last case the router can give you an option to allow
>> "bicycle=use_cycleway"-roads.
> Then you really want bicycle=destination and this whole "use_cycleway"  
> crud
> is redundant if you've mapped the cycleway correctly.  I see no  
> compelling
> argument to change the world when access=destination already exists for
> exactly this situation.

First, we call this value "designated".
Then we have also cycleways without compulsory, which have also a  
(different) sign. Belongs the bicycle=designated-tag only to them with  
compulsory? Why this tag is generally implicit in highway=cycleway? We  
have also cycleways without signs, which are non-compulsory.
So there are no uniformly tagging for compulsory cycleways on the cycleway.

I.e., if I hate cycleway and need a route without to use cycleways, how  
does it work with compulsory cycleways? Banning all cycleways don't work,  
because near a compulsory cycleways I ride illegally on the road. I have  
to ban all cycleways and all roads which have a compulsory cycleway  


More information about the Tagging mailing list